Infrared with Standard Cameras

First, I should probably write a few things about the tick bite that I got this past Thursday.  Actually, I think it is past time for an update.

The site of the bite hurts...  all around the area hurts.  The tick was latched onto the right side of my abdomen under my waistband and the pain radiating from that relatively tiny spot is felt past my groin to the left and down below my right hip on the right.  I can also feel the pain deeper into my body at the site of the bite.  It is sort of an ache...  a mild burning ache...  maybe not "burning" but a warm ache.  

When I got out of the shower today, I noticed I have about a two inch diameter pale white area around the red bite area.  It is not a bullseye but it is an odd pale lack of skin coloring around the bite area.  I'm not sure what this means, to be honest.  (Note:  After being out of the shower about an hour or so, that pale white area is no longer visible...  so, strange.)

I have a very low grade fever now.  I'm just under 99 degrees.  We'll see what happens in the next few hours.  (Note:  After a long nap, the fever has dropped by a few tenths of a degree so that is good.)  (And, note again at 6pm...  the fever is back up to 99.3 degrees.  So, we seem to be inching up.  And, naturally, this is a holiday weekend so if I need health advice, I will need to run up to our hospital emergency department in Burlington...  something I do not want to do on a holiday weekend.)

I'm still sort of feeling "kind of crappy".  I feel slightly better than I did yesterday, I think, but I'm still not feeling well in the least.  The biggest problem is that deep radiating pain around the site of the bite...  and, I feel sort of crampy....  and exhausted.   Honestly, I've mentioned before that it is difficult to tell what might be due to the tick and what might be due to my primary illness.  Certainly, the pain radiating around the site of the bite is due to the tick.  "Feeling lousy" isn't so certain though.  I often feel lousy.

So, now for a new topic.  

This morning, after watering all the flower gardens outside, I decided to shoot some photos.  After a long conversation I had in a photography forum about monochrome imaging over the past week or so, I wanted to test a couple of other cameras.  

I set up a tripod and chose two cameras for this particular comparison...  my little, compact Fuji X30 and my old Olympus E-500 that has an impressive old Kodak CCD sensor.  I knew the Olympus E-500 with this Kodak sensor would capture a far nicer image but I wanted to compare the two.  

Both of the photos were shot using a Hoya Infrared R72 filter which is a 10-stop deep red filter.  Since this dark filter cuts 10-stops of light, a tripod is necessary.  Plus, any motion in the scene will be blurred due to the longer shutter speed needed.  This morning, I had some mild breezy conditions so the leaves were moving a bit so the conditions weren't ideal.

This first one, below, was shot with my little compact Fuji X30 camera.  This is definitely not the ideal camera for this type of photography but I wanted to try it.  The sensor is quite small so it is lacking some resolution rendering "fine detail".  That is expected from this relatively small sensor though.  I do notice this lack of resolution but, honestly, most people wouldn't notice it.  

For this photo, I had the shutter open for almost three-quarters of a second.  For this type of photography, this is actually a rather short shutter speed but it is long enough to need a tripod though regardless of how good the image stabilization of the camera is...

This next photo is the one I knew would be the best one of these two by far.  This Olympus E-500 has a significantly larger sensor and this sensor is a highly regarded Kodak CCD sensor.  This sensor provides beautiful, smooth tonality.  Plus, it is known to do well in infrared photography.

Actually, since this camera has no live view...   just an optical viewfinder...  I expected to have some difficulties with focusing.  It turns out that my expectations were unfounded.  This camera had absolutely no problems focusing with this deep, dark filter cutting so much light.  I was pleasantly surprised.

The shutter speed on this photo, below, was a full second long.   This is still a rather short shutter speed for using this type of dark filter but, again, it is long enough to need the use of a tripod to keep things steady.  This photo is definitely noticeably better than the photo above but I expected it to be.  

I like how dark the sky is in this photo while the highlights are nice and bright.  There is a smooth gradation between the darks and the lights too.  That is an indication of the beautiful tonal quality of this old Kodak sensor.  

I might need to do more landscape imaging with this old Olympus E-500 camera.  Even though the camera is almost 20 years old, the sensor in this camera produces beautiful, warm color (although this photo is monochrome) with great tonality.  I've always loved the tonality and color that this old CCD sensor produces.

Using this old camera is a much slower process than when using a newer digital camera.  This old digital camera is more like using a film camera...  very deliberate and slow.  The results can be spectacular though.

Okay, I need to lay down now.  Even though it is two in the afternoon, I can barely keep my eyes open.  (Note:  I slept soundly until 5pm.  I truly was exhausted.)